[Dr. Shedd of New York, in the following extract, emphasises a point in the Fourth Commandment controversy which is often overlooked.]
“THE importance of a true view,” he says, “in order to good practice is illustrated by the controversy now going on respecting the observance of the Sabbath. Those who advocate the secularisation of the Lord’s Day take the view that the seventh day of the week was set apart by God merely that man might rest from bodily toil. They defend the Sabbath chiefly upon the ground that the aching muscle and the tired brain are better prepared for six days’ work by a cessation from physical and mental strain. This theory is part and parcel of that materialism, American [and British] society and institutions. It supposes the body is of more consequence than the soul and that the interests of time are superior to those of eternity. According to this view, if it could be shown that man would not be the better of only six days’ toil and one day’s rest, the Sabbath would have no claim upon his observance. The view of the Sabbath as presented in the Scriptures is directly opposite to this. According to both Moses and Christ, the end for which the seventh day is set apart is worship. The purpose is to afford to toiling man an opportunity to think of his Maker, and draw nigh to Him by prayer and praise. ‘Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.’ The descriptions in the Old Testament imply not merely a cessation from manual labour, but from all mental labour that is secular and relates only to earth and time. A divine blessing is promised to him, and to him alone, who turns away his foot from doing his pleasure on God’s Holy Day, and calls the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable, and honours Him, not doing His own ways, nor finding his own pleasure, nor speaking his own words (Is. lviii. 13). When Christ denominated Himself the Lord of the Sabbath, He meant the Sabbath as thus appointed and described in the Old Testament and hereby sets the seal of His approbation and authority upon it. Accordingly, all the physical and temporal purposes and benefits of the Sabbath must be set second to these religious and spiritual benefits. When they come—as they do in the train and as the inevitable consequences of a right observance of the Fourth Commandment—they are not to be regarded as the chief end of its constitution, or the main reason why it was given. An old divine says that merely to abstain from labour without engaging in public worship is to keep the Sabbath as the cattle keep it. The truth is that there is nothing obligatory in the observance of the Sabbath unless it be a day of worship. It is a man’s solemn duty and if he fails to worship his Maker, and if he fails to perform it he is guilty, and will be sentenced as such in the Great Day. When, therefore, you bid him to keep the Sabbath for this purpose you hold on his conscience and he cannot combat you except by taking infidel ground and denying all obligation of this kind. But when you are silent upon this religious point and tell him to rest on the seventh day because his bodily health requires it or his mental relaxation makes it necessary you are presenting a merely prudential and worldly motive which has no moral force. He can say to you: ‘I am a better judge in respect to what my own worldly interests require than you are. I think that they will be best promoted by labouring as much as I please doing what I like on any day and every day of the week.’
But it is objected that multitudes will not go to the house of God and worship Him on the Sabbath and, therefore, it is better to say to them: ‘Do the next best thing; go into the reading room and read what you like; go into the park, or out into the country, and breathe the fresh air.’ This has actually been said by professed ministers of Christ, and judging from the apathy of many professed followers of Christ, meets approval from a portion of the visible church. This is certainly a reckless and bold dealing with the law of God. Suppose that this method should be adopted with all the commandments instead of with one of them. Suppose that the [professed] minister of the gospel should say to his audience: ‘Many of you find it impossible to love God with all your heart; do the next best thing, love your wife and children; many of you find it difficult to love your neighbour as yourself; do the next best thing, love your farm and merchandise.’ . . . . . The view recently broached that the reading newspapers and [secular] magazines, riding or sauntering in the country, and similar occupations and amusements, is what God intended when He said on Mount Sinai: ‘Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy,’ will prove, in its effects upon society, to be the teaching of a false prophet, and be as destructive as a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” (Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy, pp. 162-166.)